On Wed, Jun 15, 2022 at 02:53:58AM +, Luke Dashjr wrote:
> Bitcoin Knots still uses this service bit, FWIW (though due to a bug in some
> older versions, it wasn't signalled by default). There are probably at least
> 100 nodes with full RBF already.
Right. However it looks like you do not ad
Bitcoin Knots still uses this service bit, FWIW (though due to a bug in some
older versions, it wasn't signalled by default). There are probably at least
100 nodes with full RBF already.
On Wednesday 15 June 2022 02:27:20 Peter Todd via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 08:25:11PM -04
On Mon, Jun 13, 2022 at 08:25:11PM -0400, Antoine Riard via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> If you're a node operator curious to play with full-rbf, feel free to
> connect to this node or spawn up a toy, public node yourself. There is a
> ##uafrbf libera chat if you would like information on the settings or
>
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 01:15:08PM -0400, Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One
Victim of Many via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I'm replying to Peter, skipping the other emails.
>
> I perceive all these emails as disruptive trolling, ignoring the
> importance of real timestamping, while handwaving about things
I'm replying to Peter, skipping the other emails.
I perceive all these emails as disruptive trolling, ignoring the
importance of real timestamping, while handwaving about things that
are roughly false and harmful.
Since the start of cryptocurrency, Bitcoin has been used to write
timestamps that s
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 08:45:43AM -0400, Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One
Victim of Many via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > The basic service that a timestamp service provides is “this content (or at
> > least a digest of this content) existed at least as early as this
> > timestamp.” It says nothing abou
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 07:53:29AM -0400, Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One
Victim of Many via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> I was privately asked for more opinions. I am sharing them publicly below:
>
> It's always been clear that OTS proves longness of duration but not
> shortness. It doesn't demonstrate
If someone wants more linearity and uniqueness guarantees from a timestamp,
that isnt what OTS was designed for. Here is a protocol that was:
https://www.commerceblock.com/mainstay/
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022, 3:56 PM Bryan Bishop via bitcoin-dev <
bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org> wrote:
> On Tue
On Tue, Jun 14, 2022 at 8:48 AM Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One Victim of
Many via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> OTS needlessly adds the requirement that the user publicize their .ots
> files to everybody who will make use of the timestamp.
Publication is not a component of the OTS system.
This does no
hi r1m, i'll talk with you as long as it's fun to do so.
>> the reason i call this 'designed to be broken' is that it lets people
>> rewrite history to their stories by republishing other people's
>> documents under different contexts.
>
> The basic service that a timestamp service provides is “th
Good morning Undiscussed Horrific Abuse, One Victim of Many,
> the reason i call this 'designed to be broken' is that it lets people
> rewrite history to their stories by republishing other people's
> documents under different contexts.
The basic service that a timestamp service provides is “this
hey various,
it's been obvious since its inception that opentimestamps is designed
to be broken.
if you have energy to normalise a better system, or support one of the
other better systems that already exists, that's wonderful.
i suspect the opentimestamps ecosystem is very experienced at defend
I was privately asked for more opinions. I am sharing them publicly below:
It's always been clear that OTS proves longness of duration but not
shortness. It doesn't demonstrate that an earlier work was not
published, because it hashes each document hash with private material
the author must separa
On Mon, May 02, 2022 at 08:59:49AM -0700, Jeremy Rubin wrote:
> Ok, got it. Won't waste anyone's time on terminology pedantism.
>
>
> The model that I proposed above is simply what *any* correct timestamping
> service must do. If OTS does not follow that model, then I suspect whatever
> OTS is, i
Hi Suhas,
Thanks for your attention and feedback!
> Transaction A is both low-fee and non-standard to some nodes on the
network...
> ...Whenever a transaction T that spends A is relayed, new nodes will send
INV(PKGINFO1, T) to all package-relay peers...
> ...because of transaction malleability, a
15 matches
Mail list logo
